Perceived legitimacy of intergroup status differences: its prediction by relative ingroup prototypicality

By Ulrike Weber, A. Mummendey, S. Waldzus. 2002

105 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e623475ceebc4e01c82029a819312f09ec8dc20e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

1. A. Mummendey
2. S. Waldzus
3. Michael Wenzel
4. Jolanda Jetten
5. Russell Spears

In Social Psychology

1. A. Mummendey
2. S. Waldzus
3. Michael Wenzel
4. Russell Spears
5. Jolanda Jetten
6. Martijn van Zomeren
7. M. Verkuyten
8. Tom Postmes

In Sociology and Political Science

1. A. Mummendey
2. S. Waldzus
3. Michael Wenzel
4. Russell Spears
5. Jolanda Jetten
6. M. Verkuyten
7. Martijn van Zomeren
8. Tom Postmes

Citations in the corpus

• The divisive potential of differences and similarities: The role of intergroup distinctiveness in intergroup differentiation (2003, background): “Finally, in line with Weber et al. (2002), we predicted that under high distinctiveness conditions high identifiers are more likely to emphasise differences between groups when a superordinate identity is salient and that this will enhance positive differentiation.”
• Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model (2007, background): “336 WENZEL, MUMMENDEY, WALDZUS Following social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), group members generally prefer their ingroup to be relatively positively valued, as this contributes to a positive social identity.”